ND how in the world?

#5
#5
I don't necessarily think they deserved to be #8, but to their defense they had a bye week after losing at Miami.
 
#11
#11
For them to be ranked right now, means that some morons or ND nut huggers are voting them pretty highly to offset a lot of folks that would have them out of the top 25.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh
#12
#12
Their problem is they play VN style defense. They try to play man to man all night and just made an average SEC QB look like he’s Johnny Manziel
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#14
#14
Godfatha said:
For them to be ranked right now, means that some morons or ND nut huggers are voting them pretty highly to offset a lot of folks that would have them out of the top 25.
Click to expand...

Do you really think there are 25 teams better than them simply because they lost to two top 10 teams by a total of 4 points?
 
#17
#17
Hunter10139 said:
Sounds like you're describing a power rating which is predictive of results. Rankings should be about what you've done, not what people think you may do.
Click to expand...

Says who?

Playing two top 10 teams down to the wire is doing something. It's not just about counting wins and losses.
 
#19
#19
n_huffhines said:
Says who?

Playing two top 10 teams down to the wire is doing something. It's not just about counting wins and losses.
Click to expand...
Me, my opinion. It makes no sense to do otherwise. If isn't about what you've achieved, then why even play the games. Just put the top twelve power rated teams in a playoff.

They played two teams down to the wire and lost. If they're good enough to be ranked, they can earn their way back as they win games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc
#20
#20
G0-EjwgXgAAAyfl
 
#21
#21
Hunter10139 said:
Me, my opinion. It makes no sense to do otherwise. If isn't about what you've achieved, then why even play the games. Just put the top twelve power rated teams in a playoff.

They played two teams down to the wire and lost. If they're good enough to be ranked, they can earn their way back as they win games.
Click to expand...

Then why are teams ranked before the season starts?

That's not how it works. It's subject to each voter's preference. Some guys will vote solely based on record. Others will do it solely based on how good they think the team is. Most probably use a hybrid model. I'm not trying to reward wins, I'm trying to figure out who the best teams are.

If Notre Dame isn't actually good, they'll fall out of the rankings, right? Same difference.

If I were a voter in week 3, I would want my ballot to look like the the rankings after conference championship weekend. It takes no skill in analysis to say "ND is 0-2, so not good enough to be ranked." That's a caveman's ballot.
 
#23
#23
n_huffhines said:
Then why are teams ranked before the season starts?

That's not how it works. It's subject to each voter's preference. Some guys will vote solely based on record. Others will do it solely based on how good they think the team is. Most probably use a hybrid model. I'm not trying to reward wins, I'm trying to figure out who the best teams are.

If Notre Dame isn't actually good, they'll fall out of the rankings, right? Same difference.

If I were a voter in week 3, I would want my ballot to look like the the rankings after conference championship weekend. It takes no skill in analysis to say "ND is 0-2, so not good enough to be ranked." That's a caveman's ballot.
Click to expand...
Preseason rankings should just be for fun and rankings after that should fluctuate significantly based on results. Ultimately preseason rankings should be meaningless, in my opinion (I realize that's not the world we live in).

It seems to me where you and I differ is you want to find the best teams and I want to reward overall best performances on the field to this point. How about we do a hypothetical scenario for a second. Let's say you have two teams with comparably difficult schedules who are both vying for the last playoff spot. Team 1 has a record of 9-3 and team 2 has a record of 10-2. Let's say team 1 is favored over team 2 by a touchdown on a neutral field, has a huge talent advantage, and most people believe they are the better team. Which team should get in? In my opinion, the team with the better on the field record should get in, even though they may not be the best team by any other metric. I feel the same way about rankings. In my opinion, ND shouldn't be rewarded with a ranking until they have had positive on the field results. (Again, I realize this isn't how rankings work, this is how I think they should work).

I'll also point out that there's not enough data on any team at this point to make a final say on them. We think Miami and Texas A&M are good, but the data we have is limited.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc
#25
#25
n_huffhines said:
Then why are teams ranked before the season starts?

That's not how it works. It's subject to each voter's preference. Some guys will vote solely based on record. Others will do it solely based on how good they think the team is. Most probably use a hybrid model. I'm not trying to reward wins, I'm trying to figure out who the best teams are.

If Notre Dame isn't actually good, they'll fall out of the rankings, right? Same difference.

If I were a voter in week 3, I would want my ballot to look like the the rankings after conference championship weekend. It takes no skill in analysis to say "ND is 0-2, so not good enough to be ranked." That's a caveman's ballot.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • 1756675157172.jpg
    1756675157172.jpg
    271.1 KB · Views: 2
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top